Speed Gibson

The furnace is running again thanks to a new motor, and I'm thawed out enough to resume my series. Today, I take my first look at a Lori Sturdevant column, the one she wrote Dec 5 as part of the Minneapolis Star Tribune's initial spread on this subject. She describes how the "Structure of Minneapolis works against it at [the] Capitol."

Legislators tend to be a small-r republican bunch. They tend not to cotton to an excess of democracy, with a lot of messy citizen involvement and multi-phased decision making by boards and commissions.

That's why there's always been some scorn at the Capitol when Minneapolis calls. The caller might be somebody from the office of the mayor, or the City Council, Park Board, Library Board, school board, Neighborhood Revitalization Program or the Board of Estimate and Taxation (whatever that is; even some legislators aren't sure). Minneapolis appears to be governed by a multi-headed hydra, with no one head in charge.

I'm curious why the "school board" was the only hydra head not capitalized, but I'm glad she included it. It's a big part of this picture that I'll revisit later.

But things didn't get tough for Minneapolis at the Legislature until the big-R Republicans took control, beginning with the GOP takeover of the House in 1998.

That was 20 years after the last election in which the city sent a Republican to St. Paul. If Republicans had ever been in the habit of currying favor in the state's biggest city, the habit had long since been broken.

Another habit had replaced it. Call it the Willie Sutton theory of legislating: Try to take money from Minneapolis, because that's where the money is.

Ms. Sturdevant was doing fine until this last paragraph. Yes, Minneapolis receives more education money, local government aid (LGA), etc than any other city, but you won't get rich skimming off a layer within the limits of political outcry. I'm guessing she's specifically referring to the LGA cuts of the past two years.

During long years of DFL domination at the Legislature, Minneapolis had fared well. That wasn't only because DFLers were looking out for their own. They also saw a legitimate state interest in keeping the state's biggest city livable and prosperous.

State school aid formulas were modified to help city schools cope with rising numbers of poor and non-English-speaking children. Property tax relief programs were designed with the city's aging homeowners in mind. State money flowed into city policing; state bonds built sports and cultural facilities; state assistance encouraged urban redevelopment.

That's what a smart state does for the city that is its biggest economic engine, regardless of which party dominates that city or what governance structure prevails at City Hall. But the DFLers of the 1980s and 1990s apparently didn't sell that idea very well to their Republican peers. Maybe they thought they didn't have to. If they did, they were wrong.

The general theme here is DFL good, GOP - short-sighted? But she doesn't explain why Minneapolis should be unique versus St. Paul or any other Minnesota city. St. Paul differs in size only, and can rightfully demand the same special treatment for the same sets of problems.

Minneapolis DFL Rep. Margaret Anderson Kelliher was first elected in 1998. She remembers being shocked by the level of anger and resentment toward her city that she heard voiced by some of her Republican colleagues.

"The feeling was that Minneapolis had been getting more than its share, not because it deserved it, but because it could," said Kelliher. "I'd hear things like, 'We're going to get you now.' It was like a vendetta."

Even if we take this testimony at face value, Rep. Keliher's biggest argument should be with her DFL predecessors that poisoned her well.

That's when the city's weak-mayor, strong-council-plus-independent-boards design became more than an oddity in Capitol eyes. It became an excuse for legislative neglect. It provided the city's critics with chapter and verse to make the case that Minneapolis is inefficient, ineffective and unworthy -- especially when compared with its GOP-favored twin, St. Paul.

Sturdevant speaks as if this inefficiency and ineffectiveness were an illusion. But the numbers and the organization chart don't lie; Minneapolis is all that. It is therefore not unreasonable for the Legislature to budget as if Minneapolis were more efficient and effective, forcing some needed reforms. This is tough love, not neglect. Why should Minneapolis change if the money keeps flowing in regardless?

Kelliher and other Minneapolis DFLers, including Mayor R.T. Rybak and City Council leaders, have been working ever since to persuade Republicans at the Capitol that a healthy Minneapolis is in the best interest of every Minnesotan. They've had help from some enlightened Republicans along the way. They could use more -- especially from the ones in the governor's office.

It may be there, more than in the legislative chambers, that the city's many-headed structure is doing its cause the most damage. Gov. Tim Pawlenty's insistence on no new taxes has put government on a strict diet, and has turned his staff chief, Dan McElroy, into a productivity hawk. McElroy calls the city's governance structure "burdensome," and holds it at least partly responsible for the city's workforce being almost twice the size of St. Paul's. He sees structural reform in Minneapolis as a "tremendous opportunity."

That it is -- for the city, and for the governor. Other Republicans can look at Minneapolis as somebody else's problem. Tim Pawlenty can't. As the one Republican at the Capitol who has constituents in Minneapolis, he is obliged to do more than carp about its problems.

After decrying all the problems with Minneapolis's structure, we're back to square one. More state money for Minneapolis, with or without reforms.

As I've indicated, I believe that changing to a new stronger mayor - city manager form of government would pay many dividends, including a fresh start with the Legislature and the Governor. The Governor can help, but only the DFL can make this or an equivalent reform happen. The ball is in the Democrats' court.